Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of acupuncture versus standard care for pelvic and low back pain in pregnancy: A randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture for pelvic girdle and low back pain (PGLBP) during pregnancy.

Design

Pragmatic-open-label randomised controlled trial.

Setting

Five maternity hospitals.

Population

Pregnant women with PGLBP.

Method

1:1 randomization to standard care or standard care plus acupuncture (5 sessions by an acupuncturist midwife).

Main outcome measure

Efficacy: proportion of days with self-assessed pain by numerical rating scale (NRS) ≤ 4/10. Cost effectiveness (societal viewpoint, time horizon: pregnancy): incremental cost per days with NRS ≤ 4/10. Indirect non-healthcare costs included daily compensations for sick leave and productivity loss caused by absenteeism or presenteeism.

Results

96 women were allocated to acupuncture and 103 to standard care (total 199). The proportion of days with NRS ≤ 4/10 was greater in the acupuncture group than in the standard care group (61% vs 48%, p = 0.007). The mean Oswestry disability score was lower in the acupuncture group than with standard care alone (33 versus 38, Δ = 5, 95% CI: 0.8 to 9, p = 0.02). Average total costs were higher in the control group (€2947) than in the acupuncture group (€2635, Δ = -€312, 95% CI: -966 to +325), resulting from the higher indirect costs of absenteeism and presenteeism. Acupuncture was a dominant strategy when both healthcare and non-healthcare costs were included. Costs for the health system (employer and out-of-pocket costs excluded) were slightly higher for acupuncture (€1512 versus €1452, Δ = €60, 95% CI: -272 to +470).

Conclusion

Acupuncture was a dominant strategy when accounting for employer costs. A 100% probability of cost-effectiveness was obtained for a willingness to pay of €100 per days with pain NRS ≤ 4.

SUBMITTER: Nicolian S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6476478 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of acupuncture versus standard care for pelvic and low back pain in pregnancy: A randomized controlled trial.

Nicolian Stephanie S Butel Thibault T Gambotti Laetitia L Durand Manon M Filipovic-Pierucci Antoine A Mallet Alain A Kone Mamadou M Durand-Zaleski Isabelle I Dommergues Marc M

PloS one 20190422 4

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture for pelvic girdle and low back pain (PGLBP) during pregnancy.<h4>Design</h4>Pragmatic-open-label randomised controlled trial.<h4>Setting</h4>Five maternity hospitals.<h4>Population</h4>Pregnant women with PGLBP.<h4>Method</h4>1:1 randomization to standard care or standard care plus acupuncture (5 sessions by an acupuncturist midwife).<h4>Main outcome measure</h4>Efficacy: proportion of days with self-assessed pain by numerical rat ...[more]

PMID: 31009470

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveAcupuncture is emerging as a potential therapy for relieving pain, but the effectiveness of acupuncture for relieving low back and/or pelvic pain (LBPP) during the pregnancy remains controversial. This meta-analysis aims to investigate the effects of acupuncture on pain, functional status and quality of life for women with LBPP pain during the pregnancy.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesThe PubMed, EMBASE databases, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to 15 January 2022.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRCTs evaluating the effects of acupuncture on LBPP during the pregnancy were included.Data extraction and synthesisThe data extraction and study quality assessment were independently performed by three reviewers. The mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs for pooled data were calculated. We assessed the confidence in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcomes were pain, functional status and quality of life. The secondary outcomes were overall effects (a questionnaire at a post-treatment visit within a week after the last treatment to determine the number of people who received good or excellent help), analgesic consumption, Apgar scores >7 at 5 min, adverse events, gestational age at birth, induction of labour and mode of birth.ResultsThis meta-analysis included 10 studies, reporting on a total of 1040 women. Overall, acupuncture significantly relieved pain during pregnancy (MD=1.70, 95% CI: (0.95 to 2.45), p<0.00001, I2=90%) and improved functional status (MD=12.44, 95% CI: (3.32 to 21.55), p=0.007, I2=94%) and quality of life (MD=-8.89, 95% CI: (-11.90 to -5.88), p<0.00001, I2 = 57%). There was a significant difference for overall effects (OR=0.13, 95% CI: (0.07 to 0.23), p<0.00001, I2 = 7%). However, there was no significant difference for analgesic consumption during the study period (OR=2.49, 95% CI: (0.08 to 80.25), p=0.61, I2=61%) and Apgar scores of newborns (OR=1.02, 95% CI: (0.37 to 2.83), p=0.97, I2 = 0%). Preterm birth from acupuncture during he study period was reported in two studies. Although preterm contractions were reported in two studies, all infants were in good health at birth. In terms of gestational age at birth, induction of labour and mode of birth, only one study reported the gestational age at birth (mean gestation 40 weeks). Thus, prospective randomised clinical studies or clinical follow-up studies were hence desirable to further evaluate these outcomes.ConclusionsAcupuncture significantly improved pain, functional status and quality of life in women with LBPP during the pregnancy. Additionally, acupuncture had no observable severe adverse influences on the newborns. More large-scale and well-designed RCTs are still needed to further confirm these results.Prospero registration numberCRD42021241771.

Project description:ImportanceTreating low back pain (LBP) often involves a combination of pharmacologic, nonpharmacologic, and interventional treatments; one approach is acupuncture therapy, which is safe, effective, and cost-effective. How acupuncture is used within pain care regimens for LBP has not been widely studied.ObjectiveTo document trends in reimbursed acupuncture between 2010 and 2019 among a large sample of patients with LBP, focusing on demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical characteristics associated with acupuncture use and the nonpharmacologic, pharmacologic, and interventional treatments used by patients who utilize acupuncture.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study included insurance claims of US adults in a deidentified database. The study sample included patients diagnosed with LBP between 2010 and 2019. Data were analyzed between September 2023 and June 2024.Main outcomes and measuresChanges in rates of reimbursed acupuncture utilization between 2010 and 2019, including electroacupuncture use, which involves the electrical stimulation of acupuncture needles. Covariates included age, sex, race and ethnicity, income, educational attainment, region, and a chronic LBP indicator. Secondary analyses tracked other nonpharmacologic treatments (eg, physical therapy, chiropractic care), pharmacologic treatments (eg, opioids, gabapentinoids), and interventional treatments (eg, epidural steroid injections).ResultsThe total sample included 6 840 497 adults with LBP (mean [SD] age, 54.6 [17.8] years; 3 916 766 female [57.3%]; 802 579 Hispanic [11.7%], 258 087 non-Hispanic Asian [3.8%], 804 975 non-Hispanic Black [11.8%], 4 974 856 non-Hispanic White [72.7%]). Overall, 106 485 (1.6%) had 1 or more acupuncture claim, while 61 503 (0.9%) had 1 or more electroacupuncture claim. The rate of acupuncture utilization increased consistently, from 0.9% in 2010 to 1.6% in 2019; electroacupuncture rates were relatively stable. Patients who were female (male: odds ratio [OR], 0.68; 99% CI, 0.67-0.70), Asian (OR, 3.26; 99% CI, 3.18-3.35), residing in the Pacific region (New England: OR, 0.26; 99% CI, 0.25-0.28), earning incomes of over $100 000 (incomes less than $40 000: OR, 0.59; 99% CI, 0.57-0.61), college educated (high school or less: OR, 0.32; 99% CI, 0.27-0.35), and with chronic LBP (OR, 2.39; 99% CI, 2.35-2.43) were more likely to utilize acupuncture. Acupuncture users were more likely to engage in other nonpharmacologic pain care like physical therapy (39.2%; 99% CI, 38.9%-39.5% vs 29.3%; 99% CI, 29.3%-29.3%) and less likely to utilize prescription drugs, including opioids (41.4%; 99% CI, 41.1%-41.8% vs 52.5%; 99% CI, 52.4%-52.5%), compared with nonusers.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, we found that acupuncture utilization among patients with LBP was rare but increased over time. Demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical characteristics were associated with acupuncture utilization, and acupuncture users were more likely to utilize other nonpharmacologic treatments and less likely to utilize pharmacologic treatments.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a highly prevalent condition that has substantial impact on patients, the healthcare system and society. Pain management services (PMS), which aim to address the complex nature of back pain, are recommended in clinical practice guidelines to manage CLBP. Although the effectiveness of such services has been widely investigated in relation to CLBP, the quality of evidence underpinning the use of these services remains moderate. Therefore the aim is to summarize and critically appraise the current evidence for the cost effectiveness of pain management services for managing chronic back pain. METHODS:Electronic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO from their inception to February 2019. Full economic evaluations undertaken from any perspective conducted alongside randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or based on decision analysis models were included. Cochrane Back Review Group (CBRG) risk assessment and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist were used to assess the methodological quality of eligible studies. RESULTS:Five studies fulfilled eligibility criteria. The interventions varied significantly between studies in terms of the number and types of treatment modalities, intensity and the duration of the program. Interventions were compared with either standard care, which varied according to the country and the setting; or to surgical interventions. Three studies showed that pain management services are cost effective, while two studies showed that these services are not cost effective. In this review, three out of five studies had a high risk of bias based on the design of the randomised controlled trials (RCTs). In addition, there were limitations in the statistical and sensitivity analyses in the economic evaluations. Therefore, the results from these studies need to be interpreted with caution. CONCLUSION:Pain management services may be cost effective for the management of low back pain. However, this systematic review highlights the variability of evidence supporting pain management services for patients with back pain. This is due to the quality of the published studies and the variability of the setting, interventions, comparators and outcomes.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of acupuncture versus standard care for pelvic and low back pain in pregnancy: A randomized controlled trial.

Objective

Design

Setting

Population

Method

Main outcome measure

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of acupuncture versus standard care for pelvic and low back pain in pregnancy: A randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets